Page 59 |
Save page Remove page | Previous | 59 of 231 | Next |
|
small (250x250 max)
medium (500x500 max)
Large (1000x1000 max)
Extra Large
large ( > 500x500)
Full Resolution
All (PDF)
|
This page
All
|
50
learning community; and 3) everyone is always continuously learning regardless of
her or his role in the education process. Thus, both the “external structure” (Epstein
& Sanders, 2006), such as the home, school, and community are evolving to create a
more fortified “internal structure” (Epstein & Sanders, 2006) in which interpersonal
relationships and exchanges of information are consistently contributing to the
growth and support of the child’s academic success. Epstein’s “external structure” is
similar to Brofenbrenner’s mesosystem in that the school, home and community are
working together. Epstein’s “internal structure” represents Brofenbrenner’s
microsytem in that relationships between the various structures are directly
interacting with the child. Furthermore, in adhering to the characteristics of the
learning community, co-construction and shared learning are taking place and the
educational partnership is working towards reaching their goal of creating a new
cultural model for the school, in which students can achieve academically. Freire’s
(1970) notions of trust, respect and love for the community, which enable dialogic
relationships to occur, can provide a major contribution to the co-construction
process.
It is important to note that both Epstein’s (2006) and Myers (1995) mention a
need for increasing parental engagement within the partnership. Both authors are
specific in asserting that parents’ roles in the education process are not static, but
instead evolving as a direct result of the partnership. Thus, parents are viewed as
critical elements to the partnership as well as beneficiaries (Moll, 1992). This
transforming relationship and role will be expounded upon later in the chapter.
Object Description
| Title | Co-constructing community, school and university partnerships for urban school transformation: Year two |
| Author | Woodyard, Savina M. |
| Author email | SavinaW@aol.com; savinaw@gmail.com |
| Degree | Doctor of Education |
| Document type | Dissertation |
| Degree program | Education (Leadership) |
| School | Rossier School of Education |
| Date defended/completed | 2011-03-22 |
| Date submitted | 2011 |
| Restricted until | Unrestricted |
| Date published | 2011-04-19 |
| Advisor (committee chair) | Rousseau, Sylvia G. |
| Advisor (committee member) |
Stowe, Kathy Huisong Marsh, David D. |
| Abstract | Community-school-university partnerships represent a new model of urban education reform that incorporates the overlapping spheres of influence in the transformation process. Co-constructed relationships between communities, schools and universities have the potential reshape organizational hierarchy and enable all partners to develop a new cultural model capable of transforming K-12 urban schools. This study the second and third year of one co-constructed community-school-university partnership that attempted to transform the cultural model of one urban high school.; The aim of this study is to identify and analyze the extent to which a community-school-university partnership is able to sustain elements of co-construction and other ongoing processes that are beneficial to the partnership. Also, the study will identify the persistent barriers to co-constructions and effective strategies to overcome those barriers within a community-school-university partnership. This study expands on the research conducted during the first year of the partnership’s operation and will offer insight as to the sustainability of the co-constructed processes between the community-school-university partnership. This study will also identify the methods in which the community-school-university partnership can develop a new cultural model for parental engagement in the interest of school transformation. |
| Keyword | partnership; co-construction; urban school; transformation; parental engagement |
| Geographic subject (state) | California |
| Geographic subject (country) | USA |
| Coverage date | 2000/2010 |
| Language | English |
| Part of collection | University of Southern California dissertations and theses |
| Publisher (of the original version) | University of Southern California |
| Place of publication (of the original version) | Los Angeles, California |
| Publisher (of the digital version) | University of Southern California. Libraries |
| Provenance | Electronically uploaded by the author |
| Type | texts |
| Legacy record ID | usctheses-m3759 |
| Contributing entity | University of Southern California |
| Rights | Woodyard, Savina M. |
| Repository name | Libraries, University of Southern California |
| Repository address | Los Angeles, California |
| Repository email | cisadmin@lib.usc.edu |
| Filename | etd-Woodyard-4509 |
| Archival file | uscthesesreloadpub_Volume62/etd-Woodyard-4509.pdf |
Description
| Title | Page 59 |
| Contributing entity | University of Southern California |
| Repository email | cisadmin@lib.usc.edu |
| Full text | 50 learning community; and 3) everyone is always continuously learning regardless of her or his role in the education process. Thus, both the “external structure” (Epstein & Sanders, 2006), such as the home, school, and community are evolving to create a more fortified “internal structure” (Epstein & Sanders, 2006) in which interpersonal relationships and exchanges of information are consistently contributing to the growth and support of the child’s academic success. Epstein’s “external structure” is similar to Brofenbrenner’s mesosystem in that the school, home and community are working together. Epstein’s “internal structure” represents Brofenbrenner’s microsytem in that relationships between the various structures are directly interacting with the child. Furthermore, in adhering to the characteristics of the learning community, co-construction and shared learning are taking place and the educational partnership is working towards reaching their goal of creating a new cultural model for the school, in which students can achieve academically. Freire’s (1970) notions of trust, respect and love for the community, which enable dialogic relationships to occur, can provide a major contribution to the co-construction process. It is important to note that both Epstein’s (2006) and Myers (1995) mention a need for increasing parental engagement within the partnership. Both authors are specific in asserting that parents’ roles in the education process are not static, but instead evolving as a direct result of the partnership. Thus, parents are viewed as critical elements to the partnership as well as beneficiaries (Moll, 1992). This transforming relationship and role will be expounded upon later in the chapter. |
